DirtyDees DDC

Once again..do you have any proof, or do you just have a gut feeling that Scully is leaving?

There are better ways to assess the commitment of a side than singling out one player or relying on the commentary of one media personality. We beat the most defensive team in the league in clearances, tackles and contested possessions. That takes commitment. Unfortunately commitment in itself does not prevent skill errors such as Bartrams pass in the third quarter. At the start of the year we would have been rapt to hold St kilda to a 20 point victory margin. Yes they've lost Hayes and their other key players are out of form, but they were not missing 5 of their best dozen players. We got beaten, but we were level with the Saints in the 3rd and we had periods where we played better football. That is not the form of a rock bottom side. The 7 matches in 2008 that were lost by margins of >75 points. That's rock bottom.

For the first time in years we beat the Saints in clearances, tackles and contested possessions, yet we still lost because we made too many crucial errors. There were times when our ball movement was first class and a new option for the Dees is using Watts as the 'go to' man in the middle because of his 90% disposal efficiency rate. If Evans was a first round draft pick, we'd be raving about his great first game. He reminds me of Scully with his ability to get the ball. We forget that he wasn't even our first pick in the rookie draft.

Wasn't it Aaron Davey who ran backwards into a marking contest in the first quarter? It was on the Saints' forward line and I think it happened before Tapscott was hurt. Davey got crunched; the ball spilled free and Melbourne cleared the ball out of the backline. That took some courage.

Has anyone considered that the type of improved form that's been dished out by the likes of Watts is perhaps linked to why Tom Scully is staying?

As for the 'experts'....I watched the Footy show last night - briefly. Brown and Goddard both picked Melbourne 'cos they liked the work of Jamar and Moloney. This was straight after Brownless said he pick North 'cos Jamar was injured. Go figure.

Bate was dropped because he was crap. He got 6 possessions in a game where we won by 96 points and Bate was on the ground for most of the game because Grimes was injured. He committed a terrible blunder just before half time when he was too slow to kick the ball (costing us a goal), and he still falls over too often at a contest. He struggles to take a mark overhead, his hands aren't clean and he only kicked one goal - a flukey snap off the ground. The only thing he improved was his tackling.

Back to Maric. He was picked because he is a gun kick, yet i was impressed with his handpasses yesterday. He's got good hands and a useful football brain (that short handpass to Sylvia in the 3rd or one to Green for the last goal). A pity he didn't claim a goal himself but he still finished with 11 score assists and may have a role as a midfield/forward.

He's frustrating. He looked like taking the game apart at the start of the second quarter. 3 good marks including a contested mark in the goal square, and a great lead to a terrific pass from Maric. He was giving Rutten the runaround and operating at 90% disposal efficiency which is just phenomenal. Even the little touches, the tackles, the knock-ons - all good. And then he stops. Hardly touches the ball in the second half!!! Perhaps it's only a fatigue thing and he'll get better as he gets fitter. At least his contributions occurred when the game was in the balance.

We are planning a merger because the MFC has by far the fewest assets of any club in Victoria. I believe we have about $4m in tangible assets. The next lowest figure is approx $14m.

Some of the worst stats I have seen in a long while. Inside 50s at 1/4 time - WC - 22 (is that a record?) Melbourne 5 Tackles in the forward line at half time - West Coast 13, Melbourne 0. None. Zip. Absolutely no defensive pressure in the forward 50. As a result, nearly all of WCs score to half time was due to turnovers. Despite the first half, i thought we would at least fight it out in the second half. Nup. Result - 8 WC goals to 3. Daniel Kerr said recently the biggest difference in the game (after being injured for 2 years) was the increased tackling. We really miss our two best tacklers from last year - Junior and Jordie.

So no footy for you. To quote Ian Anderson.."Really don't mind if I sit this one out" ?

We have 46 on our current list. 24 will play on Thursday night. 3 are injured. That leaves 19 listed Melbourne players who could line up for Casey on Saturday. Plus Fev. At least 3-4 will play in the Casey Reserves - maybe Fitzpatrick, Davis, McNamara and Johnson. That leaves 15 in a seriously strong squad that puts good pressure on the senior team to perform. Poor Frankston.

Good pick up. She still has a bee in her bonnet about the 2009 season. She mentions the 'losing games' issue twice in the one article and she brought it up again recently on 'Footy Classifieds'. She never mentions Richmond's performance in THAT game, or how she felt when Petterd and Grimes ran thru the centre to kick those two goals in time-on that put us in front. An interesting scenario. If Melbourne had beaten Richmond that day, and assume all other results remained the same, then Melbourne would have finished on 20 points and lost the priority pick. Richmond would have finished bottom on 18 points and picked up Scully as the number one pick. Maybe that's why Caroline is so peeved.

A possible back pocket or 'run-with' player? Sounds like competition for spots currently held by Bartram and Bail. Nothing wrong with that. He could be worth watching next saturday when the match against Frankston is televised.

Let's not forget Williams and Laidley. Unlike Roos and Thompson, these two appear very keen to restart their AFL coaching career somewhere. Throw in 7 other current coaches coming out of contract at seasons end, and we are heading to perhaps the most interesting post season period in years. Bailey is in a tricky situation at the moment. We have the second youngest list. It's still a development year for the likes of Watts, Blease, Scully, Cook, Jurrah and a few others. But this is Bailey's 4th year and I don't accept that this is another 'development' year for the coach. Last season we proved on occasions we could be very competitive against top teams like Collingwood and Footscray, and we also belted the Swans; we could see improvement in the team. We need to see similar results this year so that Bailey can say 'I can make this team a top 4 side in 2013 and beyond'. I suspect that his chances of being re-signed will depend largely on the team's performance this year, regardless of who is available after round 22.

He was also a B grade ruckman a few years ago, and he once kicked 5 playing forward against Carlton. His ability/usefulness as a forward may depend on Martin's performance in the Ruck.

You need qualifications in financial services to give investment advice. An accounting degree is insufficient.

good points. What he does, he usually does well. He contests in a pack and gets the ball out to a free player, even if it's just a tap out to Davey. He's getting game time. In 2-3 years he and Cook will be our two key position players, with Jurrah on the flank. Let's judge his career in 10 years time, not on 1/4 as a sub against a sub-standard team.

Based on what? Do you know Tom, or his family, or someone at GWS or MFC who can verify he signed a contract? Or are you just saying 'I know Tom will go 'cos i feel it in my bones'? So Scully is certain to go heh? So was Swan. And he was probably offered much more to go the GWS than was offered by Collingwood. Why didn't Swan go? because it's not just about the money. And is that $500,000 gross or net? The marginal tax rate for each dollar above $180,000 is 45%, plus Medicare Levy of 1 1/2%, plus another 1% Medicare surcharge, plus the flood levy of 1%. $500,000 x 48 1/2% = $242,500. The net gain may only be $257,500. That's a big deal if you are only getting $50 - $80,000, but the extra money loses impact if you're on $500,000 or so.

I heard he got picked over Zaharakis because of his kicking skills. We wanted a medium sized half back flanker who could hit targets. He seems like a good kick; he just can't get the footy at the moment.

Bailey was interviewed on radio before the start of the game last Sunday. He said (words to the effect) that they don't want to overburden the players with tactics ..it will only confuse them. mmmm. Some scribes have noted that we try to commence our attacks with accurate kicks from the half back line - maybe that's why we keep picking Strauss in the 25, even though he hasn't been among the best for Casey. Someone up the at the club must like him.

I thought there were good signs in the 3rd quarter. I was worried when Brisbane kicked 2 quick goals and it started to pour down, but the team toughed it out and kicked the last 4 goals for that quarter. Good to see Martin get involved in the game, and Gysberts has something. He has been criticised by some for his kicking but he hit his targets today. We still our lose structure at times. I worry when we kick it long to the forward line where our tallest and only player is Wonaaemirri. Thank god for Jurrah.

They are certainly a good team; Burgoyne is a big pick-up, and Josh Gibson fills a role in their backline. We only have 3 guys on our list who have played at other clubs and maybe this will change when we fine-tune our team in 2013 and beyond. But it takes two teams to perform a 72 point turnaround in a half a football. Our major problems are the centre clearances and the kickouts and that shows up in all the stats. If Bailey can produce a better set of figures in the remaining matches, then he may prove to be the best guy to lead us into the top 4. But i'm worried that we do the same things, we make the same mistakes and we get the same unacceptable results. Jimmy has rarely gone public with criticism of our performance and he did the right thing by speaking up during the week.

There's the problem. i don't think we did smash them in the second. We were behind in all those stats at half time ...like clearances and stoppages. We took our chances well, but we also dodged a bullet because of their poor kicking. Interesting to compare our performance with Richmonds' last night. After quarter time they were even with inside 50's, clearances were even, and contested footy was even. We got smashed in all areas. The Tigers got beaten by a bigger margin than us, but at least they appear to have learnt from their bad start. I'm going to the game today and I'll barrack for the dees to do well. I WILL have to sit on my own after my inexcusable performance in the stands last week. I promise to sit quietly and not drink.